OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to assess the accessibility, usability, reliability and quality of information on the Internet written for the lay public about orthodontic retainers, and to elucidate the different retention protocols encouraged. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, observational study. SETTING: Online, using a computer connected to the Internet in Australia. METHODS: Two search terms; 'orthodontic retainer' and 'how long should someone wear a retainer after their braces are removed?' were entered alternatively into five search engines. Twenty results for each search term per search engine that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were evaluated in terms of accessibility, usability, reliability and quality of information using the LIDA and DISCERN instruments, ensuring there were no internal or cross-search engine duplicates. Any information about frequency and duration of retainer wear was also collected. RESULTS: Two hundred different websites were identified and assessed. The median overall LIDA score was 72%, corresponding to a moderate quality level. The median total DISCERN score was 47%. Twenty-two websites recommended patients adhere to the specific protocol prescribed to them by their practitioner. There were 45 (22.5%) and 28 (14%) websites advising indefinite use of removable and bonded retainers respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Information about retainers on the Internet is easily accessible and usable, though the quality of the content is generally of a moderate level. However, the information is not always accurate and reliable. Both full-time and part-time wear of removable retainers was suggested over greatly varying time periods. Indefinite wear of removable and bonded retainers was also advocated.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to assess the accessibility, usability, reliability and quality of information on the Internet written for the lay public about orthodontic retainers, and to elucidate the different retention protocols encouraged. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, observational study. SETTING: Online, using a computer connected to the Internet in Australia. METHODS: Two search terms; 'orthodontic retainer' and 'how long should someone wear a retainer after their braces are removed?' were entered alternatively into five search engines. Twenty results for each search term per search engine that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were evaluated in terms of accessibility, usability, reliability and quality of information using the LIDA and DISCERN instruments, ensuring there were no internal or cross-search engine duplicates. Any information about frequency and duration of retainer wear was also collected. RESULTS: Two hundred different websites were identified and assessed. The median overall LIDA score was 72%, corresponding to a moderate quality level. The median total DISCERN score was 47%. Twenty-two websites recommended patients adhere to the specific protocol prescribed to them by their practitioner. There were 45 (22.5%) and 28 (14%) websites advising indefinite use of removable and bonded retainers respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Information about retainers on the Internet is easily accessible and usable, though the quality of the content is generally of a moderate level. However, the information is not always accurate and reliable. Both full-time and part-time wear of removable retainers was suggested over greatly varying time periods. Indefinite wear of removable and bonded retainers was also advocated.
Entities:
Keywords:
Consumer health information; Internet; orthodontic retainers; orthodontics; search engine